郭建：TeachingtheStoryoftheFall：A

　　“Doyoureallythinkasnakecantalk？”IrememberaskinginclassinresponsetotheinsistenceofafewstudentsonaliteralreadingofthethirdchapterofGenesis。Thatwasmanyyearsagowhen，forthefirsttime，ItaughtselectionsfromtheBibleaspartofanundergraduatecourse。Iwasyoung，then，anddidn’tknowbetter。But，nevertheless，whatabluntquestion！AndfurtherresponsesIhadfromthisgroupofstudentswerenolessblunt：“Well，itdependsonwhatyoubelieve，”afemalestudentsaidwithallsincerity。Thoughtheclass，apparentlybenefitingfromitstoleranceforoutrageousquestionsandspontaneousresponsesdespiteallkindsoftensionsandconflicts，wasquitelively，Iblushatthebarethoughtofthisparticularexchange。Ontheotherhand，aneyeopener，asmystudentswouldsay。
　　ThecoursethatIhavejustmentionediscalledthe“WorldofIdeas，”whichcoversliteraturefromfourdisciplinesandtwocultures。Sinceitisacompulsorygeneraleducationofferingonourcampus，eachsectionisusuallydiverseenoughtoincludestudentsfromvariousreligiousandpoliticalbackgroundsandpersuasions。Attheoneendofthespectrumarethoseadoptingadogmaticapproachtotheirreligiousheritage，liketheonestakingatalkingserpentforgranted。Duetoagenerallackofliteralscripturalbasisfortheirconviction，theyarenotexactlyliteralistsorfundamentalists：theyhavecometoknowtheirBiblequitewellmostlybylistening，and，havingnotheardofAugustinefromchurchfathers，theytendtothinkofthestoryofthefallasthestoryoftheOriginalSin。Attheotherendofthespectrumarethosewhomayhavesufferedasmuchfromalackofexposuretooutdatedprintmediabutwhohappentofeelmuchliberatedfromtheburdenofthepastsoastoconsidertraditions，religioustraditioninparticular，tobeprimitive，superstitious，irrational，andirrelevant。Studentsatbothendsareusuallymoreactiveinclassthanthemoderatebutmoreorlessindifferentmajority，andthisrathersilentmajorityconsiststypicallyoffaithfulpostmodernistswhosincerelybelieve，“there’snorightorwrong，it’sjustamatterofopinion。”ComparedwithmystudentstocompletethissketchofatypicalclassoftheWorldofIdeasItendtobemoreenamoredthanthemajoritywithuniversaltruthsbutbelessconfidentinmyownconvictionsthantheextremes。RegardingtheselectionsfromtheBiblewecoverduringthefirstweekofclass，IamalwayseagertosharewiththeclassmyfondnessofthestoryofthefallasaninterestedreaderfromoutsideofJudeoChristiantradition：likethestoryofNarcissusfromGreekmythologyorthestoryofsourgrapesfromAesop’sfables，itisoneofthegreateststoriesevertold，notsomuchbecauseitisafoundationstoryofareligiousfaithasbecauseitspeaksmuchofhumanityingeneralandofeachoneofusinparticular。But，no，Iatleast，notinastraightforwardmannerofprofessingasIwouldhavepreferredbutforthelessonIhavelearnedfrommystudents：Somuchdependsonwhatonebelievesthatnooneisentitledtoassumetheroleofalightbearer，whomayjustaswellturnouttobeaselfinvitedthirteenthguestatsomeone’sdinnertable。
　　Eventually，however，IdidaccomplishtoamoderatedegreewhatIintendednotbytellingmystudentswhatIthoughtofthestoryofthefallbut，first，bytreatingBiblicalinterpretationspartlyasanissueofintellectualandliteraryhistoryanddiscussingthemoreorlesshumanistandnaturalistreadingsofthereligiousfablebylate18thandearly19thcenturyRomanticwritersand，second，byadoptingacrossculturalperspectiveandreadingthestoryincomparisonwithapassageofsimilarimportfromtheTaoTeChingofancientChina。Irather，they，includingselectionsfromtheBible，werechosenindependentofoneanotherfortheuniquecontribution（s）ofeachtothecentralthemeofthecourse：thegoodlife，or“eudaimonia”（），aconceptthatphilosophersofancientGreececonsideredtobecentraltoallhumanquests。However，literaryborrowings，historicalinterpretations，andculturalparallelsallmadetheclassmoredynamicandthereadingsmoreconnectedandmoreinteresting。OnlyinhindsightdoIseethatmyadoptionoftheseapproachesininterpretingtheBiblicalstory，partlyasastrategytospeakinanother’svoice，alsomarkedmydeparturefromamorespontaneousandmorestraightforwardwayofteaching：Ihavebecomemoreawareofthedifferencebetweenmyaudienceandmyselfandcertainlyfeltashamedofmyinitialbluntness，
　　andIhavebeguntoseethenecessityofretailoringtheuniformattireofhumanismforanageofcrossculturalencounters，globalization，andpoliticalcorrectness。
　　FromtheBiblicalstorytotheRomanticpoem，for，inresponsetomyquestionofhowonemayrelatetotheGenesisstorytoday，therearealmostalwaysacoupleofstudentsintheWorldofIdeasclasswhoarewillingtocommentonconnectionsbetweentheBiblicalEdenandtheirownchildhood。There，already，isadawningawarenessthatAdamandEve’ssubsequenttastingofthefruitfromthetreeofknowledgeastoldinGenesiscouldbesuggestiveofaprocessofgrowingupandmaturationthateveryindividualexperiences。Quitenaturally，discussionsoffondlyremembereddetailsofchildhoodpregnantwithsuchawarenesswouldsetthestagefortheentranceofsuchRomanticwritersasWilliamWordsworth，whoseautobiographicalpoemThePreluderecaststheBiblicalvisionofhistoryintermsofindividualhumanexperience。But，no，weread“LinesComposedaFewMilesaboveTinternAbbey”and“Ode：IntimationsofImmortalityfromRecollectionsofEarlyChildhood”instead。Inbothpoems，thelifejourneyofanindividualispresentedasastoryofparadiselost：Thecelestialgloryofchildhood，blessedwithinnocentandspontaneousjoy，graduallyfadesintothelightofcommondayasthechildgrowsup。〔1〕Atthesametime，however，thefallisalsoahumanizingprocess：whatislostistheinstinctandspontaneityoftheyoungchildasananimaltowhomnatureis“allinall，”whilethe“abundantrecompense”forsuchlossabargainthepoetfindshardtoacceptbuteventuallyrecognizesasinevitableisthethoughtfulnessthatmakesachild’sdreamrecedeandgivestheadultpersonanearforthe“still，sadmusicofhumanity。”〔2〕
　　VerymuchlikeWordsworth，butmoreinthespiritofEmersonianTranscendentalism，theAmericanwriterHenryDavidThoreautakesasecularhumanistapproachtothescriptureandwritesaboutourfallfromnatureintosociety。Ourlifeisnotaltogetheraforgetting，Thoreauwrites，withaWordsworthianecho，inhis“LifewithoutPrinciple，”（Again，aswithWordsworth，weskipThoreau’smajorworkWaldenandreadashortposthumouspieceinstead）；itisalsoarememberingofsomethingofwhichweshouldneverhavebeenconsciousinthefirstplace。〔3〕Onthenormalpathoflife，weadoptcoarseandvulgaradultappetitesforfameandfortune，weputtosleepthehigherandfinerinstinctsthatwehadaschildren，andweshutourmind’seyeandfallintoaslumberofvegetativelife。Apparently，beingAmerican，ThoreauseesourfallintosocietyinmuchmorenegativelightthanWordsworthoftheOldWorld。Andyet，toThoreau，aswellastoEmerson，thekingdomofheavenisactuallyathand：Regenerationoflifecanbeginanytimeforanyonewhoiswillingtoresisttemptationsofamorallydepravedacquisitivesocietyandbecomesawareofthevitallifeforce，theuniversalspirit，whichstreamsthroughtheuniverse，makingallthingsinterconnectedandalive，andwhichisonlyconsciousinthehumanmind。
　　ForvariousreasonstheRomantichabitofmindpresentsconsiderabledifficultiestothecurrentgenerationofcollegestudents。But，sincewriterslikeWordsworth，Thoreau，andEmersonarehighlyrelevanttoourreadingofthestoryofthefall，IusuallyneedtodevotequiteabitoftimetoacquaintingmystudentswiththehistoricalcontextoftheRomantic“highargument”andexplainingthelittlewereadofWordsworthandTnamely，theeffortoftheRomanticgenerationtomakesenseofthefasterodingJudeoChristianreligioustraditionfortheageofreasonandscience。〔4〕Formypurpose，IoftenborrowM。H。Abrams’seloquentwordsregardingthisgreathistoricalendeavor：“Romanticwriters。。。undertooktosavetheoverviewofhumanhistoryanddestiny，theexperientialparadigms，andthecardinalvaluesoftheirreligiousheritage，byreconstitutingtheminawaythatwouldmakethemintellectuallyacceptable，aswellasemotionallypertinent，forthetimebeing。”〔5〕Withsuchahistoricalperspective，naturally，IhighlightthedepartureoftheRomanticreadingsfromtraditionalinterpretationsandtrytohelpmystudentsseehowthenewreadingsmay“update”theancienttaleforus。Ifindthisperspectivealsotobeagentleandquietsteptowardsformingthequestion，“Afterall，whatisthetruthofthestoryofthefall？”withoutactuallyaskingit。
　　WhenwecometotheTaoTeChing，however，wehaveanantitheticalsituationasfarasitsrelationtotheBibleisconcerned：thereisabsolutelynohistoricalconnection，andradicaldifferencesbetweentheeastandthewest（tomostofmystudents，
　　theBibleisofthe“west”regardlessofitsorigin）aretakenforgranted。Consequently，ItakeaquitedifferentapproachinposingaquestionaboutthebeginningofChapter2oftheTaoTeChing：
　　Thewholeworldrecognizesthebeautifulasthebeautiful，
　　Thewholeworldrecognizesthegoodasthegood，yetthisisonlythebad。〔6〕
　　“Didwereadsomethinglikethisbefore？”Iwouldaskinclass。RarelyaremystudentsabletorecallthestoryofthefallfromGenesisuntilIalludetotheimplicationintheBiblicalstorythatAdamandEve’sbeinggoodtheconditionfortheirstayingintheGardenofEdeniscontingentontheirnotknowingwhatgoodis。Icanseehowpuzzled，andthensurprised，mystudentsarebythisunexpectedconvergenceoftheBiblicaltaleandtheTaoistmaximsincethelatter，inforeignandabstractterms，pointstoanapparentlyunfamiliarparadoxcentraltoastorythatissupposedtobethoroughlyfamiliartothem。Thepointbecomescleareraswereadon
　　ThusSomethingandN
　　T
　　T
　　T
　　N
　　Beforeandafterfolloweachother。〔7〕
　　“Youcan’tknowwhatisgoodunlessyouknowwhatisevil，too，”somestudentswouldofferacommentatthispoint，comingtomyhelpbyresurrectingtheBiblicalphrase“knowledgeofgoodandevil。”ThisisamomentIalwayswanttocelebrate，becausecrossculturalreadinghelpsmeaccomplishsomethingforwhichIhavestrivensohardwithoutmuchsuccesssofar：Forvariousreasonsincludingtheperceptionthatknowledgeispowerandthebeliefthatknowledgeistheveryreasonwhystudentsareintheclassroomtheideaof“fallingintoknowledge”“Theyfallintosin”or“Theyfallintoevil”hasbeenthecharacteristicresponseofmystudentstomyquestionabouttheprepositionalobjectdespitemyreiterationsoftheBiblicaltextdirectlyrelevanttothisissue。But，now，readingaforeigntext，theyseemtobeabletowrestlewiththeideaincognitivetermsandeventohavebeguntounderstandthecomingintobeing，aswellastheinterdependence，ofopposites，includingthatofgoodandevil，anideathatseemstohavealwaysbeenthereinthescripture。
　　What，then，isthenatureofthefall？Bynow，the“fallintoknowledge”isnolongeraquestionformystudents。Instead，“whatkindofknowledge”becomesthequestion。TheBiblicalstoryseemstoindicate，atleastonthesurface，thatitismoralknowledge，whiletheTaoTeChing，withashortlistofopposites，including“good”and“bad，”coversamuchbroaderrange。Forthediscussiontocontinueonthisissue，myclassdoesneedsomeprompting。Usually，acoupleofquestionsaboutAdamandEve’spostlapsarianawarenessoftheirownnakednesswouldbesufficient。Studentswouldagainrecalltheirchildhoodexperienceandthenturntodiscussthebeginningofthesenseofshameandthebirthofselfconsciousness。MycontributiontothispartofthediscussionisusuallyaquotationfromRalphWaldoEmerson：“Itisveryunhappy，buttoolatetobehelped，thediscoverywehavemadethatweexist。ThatdiscoveryiscalledtheFallofMan。”〔8〕Imayalsofollowwithaquestionaboutpossibleoppositesrelevanttoselfconsciousness，andsometimesanswerstothisquestionaswell，iftheclassistooquiet：“Howabouttheselfandtheother？HowaboutyouandI？”Iwouldsay。“Withoutyoursittingthereasstudentsandlookingatme，Ican’tseemyselfasateacher。”Bynow，myclasswouldbeabletomakeafairlyphilosophicalconclusionaboutthefall，thoughfromtimetotimetheymaystillneedmyassistanceforthewordingofsuchaconclusion：itisadepartureofthehumanmindfromitsearlystageoffeelingofthingsasanundifferentiatedwholetowardamorediscriminatingadultconsciousnesscapableofconceptualizationandselfreflection。
　　AcomparativereadingoftheBiblicalandtheTaoisttextsalsomakesusawareofcertainculturalvisionsofuniversalsignificancethatmaynotbereadilyavailableshouldwetreateachtextinisolation。Alargelycriticalviewofknowledgeinbothworks，forinstance，suggestsanuneasyfeelingregardingthemovementofcivilizationawayfromthesupposedlyoriginalnaturalstateofthings。CharacteristicofsuchanattitudeandmoresociallyorientedandmoredevelopmentconsciousthanthebeginningofChapter2isapassagefromChapter38oftheTaoTeChing：
　　H
　　W
　　W
　　Whenrectitudewaslostthereweretherites。
　　Theritesarethewearingthinofloyaltyandgoodfaith
　　A
　　Foreknowledgeisthefloweryembellishmentoftheway
　　Andthebeginningoffolly。〔9〕
　　IfonetakestheOldTestamentandtheNewTestamentasawholewhichweactuallydointheWorldofIdeasclass，byreadingselectedpassagesfromanumberofbooksintheProtestantBibleamuchmoreelaboratevisionofhistoryfaithfultosuchasentimentmayemerge。Accordingtothisvision，whichmanyworldculturesseemmoreorlesstoshare，thelifeofthepresentbadlyinneedofvirtueisofaninferiorkind，and，finally，thelostearlyhistory，projectedasthegoldenage，willberestoredinthedistantfuture，andpeoplewillbehappyeverafter。WhiletheJudeoChristianviewofhistorymayhavebecomeaparadigmofthisvision，theauthoroftheTaoTeChingsharesthenostalgicfeeling，embracestheimaginedpastastheideal，butstopsshortofentertaininganapocalypticvisionofthefuture。ThebestLaozihopesforanindividualtoachieveisnomorethansecurity，peace，contentment，andlongevityofthislifeonearth，whichhebelievestobeachievableifoneiswillingtofollowtheTao，thenaturalcourseofthings。Formyteachingpurposes，IamcontentsimplytoseethatmostofmystudentsunderstandthedifferencesbetweentheotherworldlyvisionofChristianityandtheearthinessofTaoismwhilesomeofthemareabletorecognize“Eden，”“Tao”（oneofitsmeanings，asin“whentheTaowaslost”），and“GoldenAge”asdifferentnamesforthesamething。
　　AswereadtheBiblicalandtheTaoistversionsofthestoryofthefallsidebyside，Ioftenhearstudentssay“goodandevil，”referringtothesecondlineofChapter2oftheTaoTeChing。Usually，Iwouldtakeupthisslipofthetongueforitisindeedaninterestingslip，sincewehavejustdoneafairlyclosereadingofthetranslatedtextandcommentonthelargelyamoralapproachtothingsoftheauthoroftheTaoTeChing。Iusedthequalifier“largely”becausethefirsttwolinesofthesecondchapteralongwiththepassageIhavequotedabovefromChapter38doreflecttheauthor’smoralconcerns。OftheoppositeslistedinChapter2，however，“good”istheonlymoralterm，anditisalsotheonlytermthatdoesnothaveanantithesisnothinglikeanequivalentoftheEnglish“evil”isgivenastheoppositeof“good”；rather，attheendofthesecondline，thecontrastto善（good）is不善（notgood），whichD。C。Lautranslatesas“bad，”acautiouschoicethoughnotcompletelyfaithfultotheoriginal。OnewondersifthisexceptiontotherulemaynotbeanindicationthatLaozidoesnotfeelentirelycomfortablewiththeidea“evil。”Moreover，Laozi’sviewthatthedevelopmentofouraestheticandmoralconsciousnessisratherdeplorable，aTaoistversionofthehumanfall，whichisexpressedinthebeginningtwolinesofChapter2，doesnotflowsmoothlyintothedialecticobservationsoftheoppositesinthenextsixlinesinwhichhewithdrawsjudgment。Thetensionisobvious，aseventhetitleofthebookmayimply，withTao（道，way）ontheonehandandTe（德，virtue）ontheother。AttemptingtomakeLaozi’sargumentmoreconsistent，sometranslators，andscholars，too，actuallytrytointerpretthebeginningtwolinesofChapter2，“天下皆知美之为美，斯恶矣；皆知善之为善，斯不善矣，”inlightofthelinesthatimmediatelyfollow，andrepresentbeautyandugly，likewisegoodandnotgood，inadialecticrelationshipinterdependentofeachotherforexistence。〔10〕But，inclass，wedonotgobeyondD。C。Lau’stranslationforsuchacoherentreading。Besides，mystudentsusuallyenjoystrugglingwithambiguitiesandtensions。SincewereadmanyotherpassagesintheTaoTeChing，eventuallytheycometoseeLaozimoreasanaturalistthanamoralistandbegintowonderifthisexplainswhytheauthoroftheTaoTeChingtendstotakeamorephilosophicalandmorethisworldlyapproachtothestoryofthefallwhiletheBiblicalvision，withtheknowledgeofgoodandevilasapointofdeparture，isremarkableforitsmoralpassionandreligiousoutlook。
　　Theoretically，especiallyinlightoftheTaoisttext，wemaygostillfurther：Whataregoodandevil（orgoodandnotgood）anyway？Wheredotheycomefrom？And，likewise，“something”and“nothing？”Andhighandlow？AretheyPlatonicformsoutthereindependentofhumanconsciousness？Oraretheyaprioriconceptsgenetictothehumanmind？Oraretheyascurrentacademehasit“constructs，”productsofthelinguisticallyconstituted，formcreatinghumansubjectivity？Iftheyareanyoftheabove，especiallyiftheyaresimplymadeup，thenwhatfurtherconclusionsshallwedrawonthestoryofthefall？Ihaveallthesequestionsdowninmyteachingnotebook，butIhaveneverofferedtotakemystudentsbeyondtheconclusionwehavedrawn。NorhaveIeverspokendirectlyofwhatIreallythinkisthetruthoftheBiblicalstoryandtheTaoistmaxim：Forbetterorforworse，
　　wefallintohumanity。Howsimple！Howclear！ButIhavedecidedtokeepittomyselfbecauseIamafraidthatinreactiontothisrevelation，somestudentmightsay，“Well，that’swhatyoubelieve。”
　　〔1〕WilliamWordsworth，“Ode：IntimationsofImmortalityfromRecollectionsofEarlyChildhood，”ThePoeticalWorksofWilliamWordsworth，eds。ErnestdeSelincourtandHelenDarbishire（Oxford：Clarendonpress，19411949），Vol。4，pp。279285。
　　〔2〕WilliamWordsworth，“LinesComposedaFewMilesaboveTinternAbbey，”ThePoeticalWorksofWilliamWordsworth，eds。ErnestdeSelincourtandHelenDarbishire（Oxford：Clarendonpress，19411949），Vol。1，pp。259263。
　　〔3〕HenryDavidThoreau，“LifewithoutPrinciple，”ThewritingsofHenryDavidThoreau，eds。BradfordTorreyandF。B。Sanborn（Boston：HoughtonMifflin，1906），Vol。4，pp。455482。
　　〔4〕FortheRomantic“highargument，”seeWilliamWordsworth，“ProspectustotheExcursion，”ThePoeticalWorksofWilliamWordsworth，eds。ErnestdeSelincourtandHelenDarbishire（Oxford：Clarendonpress，19411949），Vol。5，pp。36。
　　〔5〕M。H。Abrams，NaturalSupernaturalism：TraditionandRevolutioninRomanticLiterature（NewYork：Norton，1971），p。66。
　　〔6〕LaoTzu，TaoTeChing，trans。D。C。Lau（NewYork：Penguin，1963），p。6。SinceIusetheLautranslationinmyclass，Ishallusethesametextinthispaperandmakequalificationswhennecessary。
　　〔7〕Ibid。
　　〔8〕RalphWaldoEmerson，“Experience，”TheCollectedWorksofRalphWaldoEmerson，VolumeIII：Essays：SecondSeries，introductionandnotesbyJosephStextestablishedbyAlfredR。FergusonandJeanFergusonCarr（Cambridge，Mass。：BelknapPressofHarvardUniversityPress，1984），pp。2549。
　　〔9〕LaoTzu，TaoTeChing，trans。D。C。Lau（NewYork：Penguin，1963），p。45。
　　〔10〕Forinstance，inthebeautifullyprinted，popularEnglishversionbyGiaFuFengandJaneEnglish（NewYork：RandomHouse，1972），thesetwolinesaretranslatedas“Underheavenallcanseebeautyasbeautyonlybecausethereisugliness。Allcanknowgoodasgoodonlybecausethereisevil。”